The Allahabad High Court has expressed deep concern over the significant delay in the transmission of viscera reports from the Forensic Science Laboratories to investigating agencies, describing the delay as “disturbing”. The bench of Justice Samit Gopal, while hearing a bail application in a dowry-death case, observed that although the viscera of the deceased was sent for examination in February 2024 and reportedly prepared by September 2024, the investigating officer only received it on February 1, 2025. Meanwhile, the charge-sheet had already been filed in September 2024 and cognisance taken in November 2024—well before the essential report was in the case diary.
Recognising that viscera-examination reports form a critical link in the chain of evidence in such matters, the Court stressed that delays in their receipt impair the completeness and integrity of investigations. It emphasised that the investigating agencies must have prompt access to such forensic reports in order to examine all relevant circumstances and arrive at reasoned conclusions. The high court underlined that absence or delay of the report may not automatically invalidate a case, but persistent systemic delay is unacceptable and undermines the administration of justice.
In view of the systemic nature of the problem, the Court directed the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, the Director General of Medical Health, and the Director General of Police to look into the matter and ensure that viscera reports are communicated without undue delay to the officers in charge of investigation. The Single-Judge observed that the State must put in place a “procedure and process of expeditiously transmitting the viscera report by the Forensic Science Laboratories to the investigating agency for its consideration”. The direction makes clear that forensic laboratories cannot treat such reports as backlog items—they must be integrated into investigation timelines as necessary evidence.
The Court’s intervention highlights the interplay between forensic science administration and criminal investigation processes. By issuing directions to senior state officials, the Court is urging institutional accountability: forensic laboratories must respond with dispatch, police officers must monitor receipt of critical reports, and the system of investigation must not proceed without key scientific results. The objective is to prevent a scenario where evidence crucial to establishing nature, cause and circumstances of death remains undecided or unexamined while the procedural wheels of criminal justice continue turning.
In sum, the Allahabad High Court’s ruling serves as a stern reminder that forensic delays contribute not just to case pendency but may critically affect the quality of adjudication in criminal trials. The directives to the State leadership underscore that forensic science must align with investigation timelines and statutory processes in order to protect the rights of both victims and accused.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.